How Many Artillery Does Russia Have - Feb 2024 Storage Bases
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 02. 2024
- Click this link to make some cash for giving your opinion! www.inflcr.co/SHK5p Thanks YouGov for sponsoring!
Check Out Project Owl on Discord
/ discord
For Business Inquiries - CovertCabal@Ellify.com
Amazon Prime 30 Free Trial - amzn.to/2AiNfvJ
Microphone I use = amzn.to/2zYFz1D
Video Editor = amzn.to/2JLqX5o
Military Aircraft Models = amzn.to/2A3NPxu
Military Strategy Book = amzn.to/2AaqwST
----------------------------------
Credits:
Footage:
Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
The NATO Channel
Ministry of Defence of Estonia
Department of Defense (US)
"The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement."
KCNA - North Korea State Media
Music:
BTS Prolog - Kevin MacLeod - incompetech.com
Hope you guys liked the video! I love using YouGov to make easy cash! Click my link: www.inflcr.co/SHK5p #YouGovPartner
🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦
Hi, if comes to the recent edition of The Military Balance, the 2023 so they have significantly decreased the number of towed artillery and mortars in storage if compared to the 2022 edition.
The Military Balance 2023:
Anti-tank guns:
1,000 T-12/MT-12 in store
SPGs:
4,260 in store: 122mm
2,000 2S1 Gvozdika; 152mm 2,000: 1,000 2S3 Akatsiya; 850
2S5 Giatsint-S; 150 2S19 Msta-S; 203mm 260 2S7 Pion
TOWED:
(7,190 in store: 122mm 4,500: 2,500 D-30;
2,000 M-30 (M-1938); 130mm 350 M-46; 152mm 2,300: 600
2A36 Giatsint-B; 400 2A65 Msta-B; 500 D-1 (M-1943); 750
D-20; 100 M-1937 (ML-20); 203mm 40 B-4M)
MRL:
(3,220 in store: 122mm 2,420: 2,000
BM-21 Grad; 420 9P138; 132mm 100 BM-13; 220mm 700
9P140 Uragan)
Mortars:
(1,300 in store: 120mm 950: 500
2S12 Sani; 450 M-1938 (PM-38); 160mm 150 M-160; SP
240mm 200 2S4 Tulpan) (500 2S9 NONA-S in store)
It’s a safe bet as well that a huge % of what remains in reserve inventories is unserviceable or in very poor condition…large percentages of Russian Reserve stockpiles were in very poor condition even prior to Feb 28, 2022. The stuff remaining in those depots is likely to be the worst of it all…mainly suitable for scavenging/salvage of various parts and components.
You should collaborate with Perun
The United States' involvement in bombing Iranian proxies in the Middle East is a prime example of our country's misguided foreign policy. Instead of focusing on the real threats to our national security, we waste time and resources on conflicts that only serve to destabilize the region further. Moreover, these actions alienate the American people from our allies and undermine our moral authority. It's high time we reassess our priorities and pursue a more strategic and thoughtful approach to international relations.
Man, always crazy that it's possible for private citizens to buy intel that would have been state of the art 50 years ago
10yrs from now: siri count how many tanks Russia has left using satellite imagery
@@daniel_dumilenah Siri sucks so bad maybe another AI
@@narutobroken I'm sure Apple will have a decent AI in ten years, and I'm fairly sure it will be called Siri. But the underlying technology will probably have nothing to do with their current Siri.
50 years ago, the ability to take these kinds of images was probably top secret. Now, any ass hat can get a high res image for a couple hundred bucks. 😂 Unreal.
@ they will just buy out someone elses
3:30 using images from the artillery museum to help identify field pieces in storage, Boss move.
A genius thing to do.
agreed 👏
do you think that’s military tradecraft? or some diy youtube sleuth skill 🤔
The RuZZkies basically delivered a key to interpret the pieces.
Haha bet someone is swearing in Russian over that right now😂👍
@@uranusismightybig5111If anything he did the job of counting their stock for them lol
Whos willing to bet perun will reference this video in his upcoming assessments?
@@thomaslacornette1282 sounds like you belong in a meat cube
@@thomaslacornette1282 The conclusion of this video is that russia will still have tons of artillery so this is far from pro-ukraine more like objective analysis
@@thomaslacornette1282....nice Fedora
Definitely he will. These are some intel gurus. The real q is, who at the CIA shits themselves when guys release?!
He already did this himself
Of course the question of how much of that equipment is still usable after sitting in the Siberian wilderness for 30 years. Unfortunately satellite images can't tell us that.
Commercially available satellites might not, but I suspect that the USA deep state has a pretty good idea.
Towed artillery would be simpler to reactivate and train crews, especially if you don't really care about accuracy. There were reports last year that the North Korean artillery ammo was of wildly variable standard. Everything from not enough propellent to far too much, leading to shells landing kilometres too short or long, to gun 'evaporating'. I don't know if that has been resolved.
@@ptonpcthere were few reports of that and we dont hear about that no more
@@ptonpcapparently they just use the Korean shells only if there’s no other choice.
The sensitive bits should be stored in the warehouses separately. So could be in quite good condition with protective coatings etc. The tyres could be thrash though.
Some additional info on the models itself:
It's worth a note that 2S19 is the only self-propelled that is still produced the others are not, gone is gone.
Also for the towed models.
B4M (30s), ML-20 (30s), M-46 (40/50s), D20/D1/M30 (30/40/50s), 2A36 (70s) are also not produced anymore.
D30 (60s), 2A65 (80s) are still in production.
MT-12 (70s) don't know.
Russia already 2 year in war. They already open new production for Cannon barrel
@@carkawalakhatulistiwa You misunderstood. These are entire systems not just barrels. I highly doubt that they bother reproducing anything for 100 year old tech. They'd be much better of building new factories that can build the new systems.
From a Russian perspective they have to empty out all of this old trash and it's ammunition. They can still fire off a few 100 rounds and then they can be abandoned. For the Ukrainians this means they have to spend millions of dollars shooting at those old systems and at the end they have the burden to dispose all this stuff spending millions of dollars again. In other words if those numbers are not 0 at the end of the war somebody will fall out of a window.
For the west it makes up for a good laugh to see Russians use this old trash but unfortunately as old as this stuff is it can still unalive people.
@@NickZimmermann but there's huge backfire by using old tech. It's less accurate, have shorter range and slower fire ratio. That means you kill less enemies and lose more of your own ppl. With more and more deaths on each side more ppl want to end war. When Ukrainians don't have much choice so they will fight almost till the end, in Russia ppl can be against goverment cause they have that choice. It isn't close to that yet, but you can find that Russians are getting tired of it and against war.
@@Whietie People are disposable in RUssia. With elections around the corner in all western states, it is hard to speculate what 2025 will bring. 2 years after the start of the war, we can tell this war will continue even in 2025.
@@Whietie Excuse me! In Russia they have an option to critize Russia? What have you been smoking?
The amount of satellite intelligence available to "a guy on CZcams" is stunning. I distinctly remember seeing satellite imagery from Desert Storm and the early days of War on Terror that were fuzzed up for public release that were 10% as clear as what is shown on a free freaking internet video. I say this not simply as a "times change" but more as a "if this is better than what the intelligence community would admit to 30 years ago, can the Key Hole satellites offer coloscopies?"
In the 80's, they said that satellite images could read the numbers off of license plates.
@@recoil53 Thats actually not a big problem. The problem is how large of a frame can you do with such a resolution.
You can bet some perv already used such a satelite to spy on a nude beach
Remember the image Trump tweeted out about the iranian nuclear site? That was what they had before 2020. Possibly an even better generation up now.
Yeah, they can. The Roman space telescope was a spy satellite, and it has a much larger and deeper field of view than the Hubble.
It was donated to NASA on one condition: Don't point it towards Earth.
Today's spy satellite technology might count the lice in someone's head.
They have to have many worn barrels by the volumes of rounds a day they shoot. New barrels do take time to make and reinstall.
True, but you've got to think they have a dedicated production line to revamp barrels and produce replacements.
@@dieLX479 Yes, comrade, stalinium barrels have made Russia impervious to maintenance.
oh you poor copenik, you're stuck in the 1980s! No wonder you won't understand how ukraine falls ;)@@downstream0114
@Scottx125Productions the problem with barrels is that they take a lot of time and are very resource dependant u don't use a high enough quality the barrel could fail or be worn quickly. Speeding up production could also cause similar problems
@@Scottx125Productions Perhaps, but [IIRC] the CZcamsr Peter Zeihan claimed that the RF has all but lost the ability to produce new tank and artillery barrels.
Interesting content. Couple bucks towards Sat photos.
Nerds, ASSEMBLE!
So, so much truth.
😂😂you got me
czcams.com/video/i6l8MFdTaPE/video.htmlfeature=shared
NED posing as nerds, funny
I'm a Nerd and don't insult me by saying that I'm one of you. Why u ask? I'm seeing these type of videos since god knows how long. Russia, apparently is running out of missiles, artilleries, tanks, men for umpteenth time now. And yet, they are repeatedly the one victorious on the battlefield. What happened to Avdivka huh?
Do you know what u do when your calculation don't match the reality? You just shut up and admit that you're doing BS all along.
A little something for future images. Your videos are just excellent.
I think 10-15 percent are used to for replacement parts but it may even be higher.
A lot of the towed "consumption" might be for replacement barrels. I know there was at least one review of satellite imagery in which it was clear that the SPG's all had their barrels removed yet had previously shown as mounted (meaning original mothballing left the barrels in place).
It would be interesting to know how many have been lost to defective North Korean ammo.
@@bubbajones5905 Interesting point. Although they won't outright blow up, wear and tear would increase significantly.
Chinese ammo is known to have huge differences in both shell weight ±20%, and gunpowder load ±40%, and are easy to corrode and cause corrosion.
I'd be shitting myself, using a barrel way over spec to fire North Korean surprise ammo.
@@bubbajones5905 Isn't the north korean ammo, ammo made by Russia and previosly sold to NK?
Using a Russian artillery museum as an 'imagery calibration target'. I... never thought of that!
Honestly... one thing I notice when looking at the satellite image. It doesn't seem the Russians are picking their equipment out of storage based by its quality, but just what stands closest to its exit. As if there were not checking at all for how good it is in shape. Just send it all to a factory, and Oleg and Ivan have to get it ready. They need longer if it's badly in shape, and are quicker if it's reasonably fine. So maybe the output we get from the Russians in reserviced vehicles will stay consistent or speed up, as they will be able to streamline their production, while the quality of their vehicles they take from storage will stay the same, as they just pick whatever is there, totally indifferent about its quality.
There is Russian logic to that, the piece of equipment parked closest to the entrance was the last one to be placed there so probably the one that sat their the shortest so still in the best condition and the best to refurbish.
Logic comrade! The rest further at the back has been canabalized and the parts traded for alcohol and money a long time ago already.
@@gilibran There might also been another logic to it. Russian logic as well. Russia is very simple with a strong top down approach when it comes to organizational pipelines.
So it might be easier, to just have some blokes load up the equipment on trains by some blokes and take it to the factories, where workers have to do the job on making them serviceable again, instead of having experts checking on the condition of the vehicles at the storage site.
And then it's simply a mixed bag in the factories, some tanks need more time, others need less time, but so what, overall, if you have the same output statistically.
Let's say the condition of your tanks is a dice roll. And you can take care of 10 tanks at the same time. Then it's like rolling 10 dices at the same time, and on average they should have a value of 3,5 per dice.
That's probably not the quickest way to get vehicles to the frontline, but the much simpler "good enough" way, which the Russian military complex is known for.
@@MrFusselig But what do you do with the ones that take more time? That is not how logistics work.
You cant leave them on the factory floor wating for parts, you will have to take them out, park them keep track of them and when the parts arrive schedule them back in and before you know it, even if you stick to good enough standards you have more tanks sitting outside then your pushing to the front.
Or that tank never leaves the parking space because another tank came in that also needed that part but was in a bit better condition so might just make it to 90%.
logistics dont work that way, Russia is better of comming up with some new cheap design they can manufacture en masse from melted down stock tanks then trying to keep up numbers by refurbishing canabilized old stock.
Unfortunatly for Russia they dont have the capacity for either.
@@gilibran Arrivals at these stores are likely at a regimental scale. Not sure individual items are a thing in the Soviet/Russian sphere....
@@MrFusselig I guess the experts are more of the bottle neck than the tanks. How can a bunch of drafties, who didnt do the basic maintenance in their storrage, evaluate the combat readyness of a piece of equipment?
A possible consideration about SPG is that if they run out of Towed in ~18 months, they will have to plug the gaps with SPG (or not have the replacement barrels).
SPG numbers will then start dropping much faster, so it's unlikely they would last 3+ years
Senior Russian commanders themselves have complained publicly that they have a critical shortage of counter battery radar systems as a result of the Ukrainians prioritizing them as targets (probably with HIMARS). This would mean that more often than not Ukraine has the advantage in artillery duels, and greater losses of Russian artillery pieces in a given engagement. The only reason Ukraine doesn't seem to have artillery dominance is because they don't have the pieces or ammunition to provide enough fires in all the places they're firing, so it appears there's an artillery stalemate where the Ukrainians don't have enough guns to fire and the Russians don't dare fire their guns lest they be destroyed.
It must be a demoralising situation for both sides. For russians it must feel like. "Whatever we move to the front gets destroyed" and Ukrainians might think "whatever we destroy gets replaced the next day"
I do have to add that still most arterilly duals are won by russia becaus of that volume of fire wich has the same acuracy of the ukrainian arterilly shots
@@kuunoooo7293
That seems like a wild claim to make, given the disparity in documented losses and the lack of progress.
A definition of "won" and a source would be helpful.
It seems more accurate to say that there's a stalemate.
@@kuunoooo7293 What? You can't just saturate a space of 50 square kilometers with so much artillery fire that any artillery battery would be hit. If you don't have counter battery tools to know where to shoot at, the artillery can only guess and those guesses are statistically equivalent to lottery winnings. I have no idea who told you this, but you are both coping hard about russian losses.
Wrong
Great video this is much more important than the armoured vehicle counts. Another more important count would be the number of Ground based Air Defence systems
@@arlekino4688Obvious bait comment, to see evidence of Ukrainian air defense see the Il-76, Il-22, A-50 and 6 Su-34s downed in the past month.
@@arlekino4688 Your comment flies as well as that A-50 comrade.
@@johnbean9797It was 1x Il76 downed with UA POWs by UA AD, 1xIl26 damaged by Blue on Blue, 1x A-50 downed by Blue on Blue, and 2xsu34 downed by UA AD.
@@Sufferingzifythat's even more humiliating for Russia.
Not only they failed to destroy Ukrainian air defenses, but they still got blue on blue matter that still wasn't solved.
And where are the bodies in that pow transport?
@@Sufferingzifyso you're saying that Russia is killing most of it's high value planes that fly very high by blue on blue.....that's either the most incompetent air force ever or a lie
Thanks for the update!
You've gotta love the dedication! Nice work as always.
Thank you for doing this.
Always amazed by your work, hats off to you sir.
Gotta love the Russia supporters in the comment section not understanding the point of this video.
As Russia is gaining land every day?
@@sherrysnyder4195 you’re proving you don’t understand the point of this video
@@sherrysnyder4195and Russia losing generals, ships, fighter jets and AWACS is kind of worse than giving up a few meters here and there.
@@theRok29the point that you don't understand is how many NATO's artilery that Ukraine has used? 😅
@@thecoin5394 that isn’t relevant to the video
I would think the numbers must be reduced by those needed to keep in reserve for defense. Even if they have 50% left, they can't reasonably allocate them all to the war in Ukraine without seriously reducing russias own defenses.
Looking at the state of this special military operation Russia probably never had any defenses to begin with, all they ever did was withdraw in front of the enemy and trick them into getting stuck in the mud (Which is a good strategy, granted) but when it comes down to actually fighting the enemy...............................................
Without the lendlease the Soviets would have lost, period, they were never any good at anything but throwing away lives and propaganda about Russian mud. And guess what? Now they themselves are getting bogged down in that same mud and winter weather they so heroically used to defeat Napoleon and the Nazi's. It's pathetic, Russia is and always was a looser country.
As we saw last year, it was pretty easy for Prigozhin to lay siege to Moscow because of a lack of Russian defenses.
Questionable tbh, I mean, who's gonna attack russia anyway. They can leave a border with Finland literally empty for example
@@user-wi7eh9de7z They have proxies in Syria and Africa.
@@user-wi7eh9de7z I would never rule out China...
I do not pretend to be and expert on artilery, it doesn.t seen to be such a hot idea storing them in the yard for 50 years.
Especially so poorly maintained in such a harsh climate.
@@tmike_tc Barrels inside are in conservation lard, other mechanisms are sealed or so sturdy it doesn't matter. These western analysis" stored under bad weather" is nonsense.
thats why theyre using them...
@@dalooter2607after 50 years in storage...
These aren’t affected by weather much
Going from prewar to current and calculating a linear consumption rate would be flawed, because even if there were zero losses, you'd have to pull a ton out of storage just to populate the front lines. Great visualizations though.
He does this count each year, so we can look at that too.
this is why assuming that pulling them out of storage doesnt mean they are destroyed like many do believe
@@unknown-user.955Um, if they do it now that is exactly what it means.
@unknownuser-vs2yw why would you pull out more artillery though? Russia, as seen earlier in this war, has eaten a lot of their shell stockpile they inherited from the SU. While not as badly as the Ukranians, they too are rationing ammunition. Tell me, if you are limited by ammo production/imports why increase the number of artillery units you can not realistically supply? Logistically it makes zero sense to have a whole bunch of guns at the ready with men and all if I don't have the ammo to make good use of them.
@@d0mram-02 russia is using a lot of artillery shells per day.
they produce 2M shell per year
they used some of their old stockpile,
also buying shells from your allies during war time is a sign to strengthen relations between countries.
I might be wrong but If I can buy some to use it now and save some for later is probably what they are doing right now.
Thanks for putting in the money and the time. This is good intel.
Great how a lot of their artillery has been sitting in the weather since the 50s
It works ..
Thank you for the video and the hard work! Much apreciated!
Very well done! Thanks for doing all this tedious counting.
A couple of points here:
Firstly, those who are sceptical of Ukraine's official figures need to do some head scratching. The video says that 9,334 artillery have gone missing. Ukraine's official figure as of today is 9,387. Oryx itself has a disclaimer that their figures are a "significant undercount" and that's because they only see the visual evidence that ends up posted to the public internet. There are a number of reasons why a particular item of hardware isn't gong to be posted to the public internet. This also seems to validate the proposition that the further something is from the front line, the less likely it is to be recorded on Oryx.
Ukraine's official figures are I believe given in good faith. Those who take Oryx as gospel (and don't even notice their disclaimer) should have a think.
Secondly, some of those remaining 9,747 units are never going to be used for anything more than spare parts. Since most are towed and as the video points out, they tend to get used as barrel donors, I'm going to wager that another 3,000 units will never see the front line and get used for parts. So we have a ballpark figure of 6,700 remaining units. Now, what is the rate of attrition? The overall rate of loss for Russian artillery over the war is 12.3 units per day. However, the average rate of loss for Russian artillery over the four weeks till Feb 4 is 23 units per day. Thanks to Another_Californian on Twitter.
Therefore Russia will exhaust its stockpile of artillery in 6,700 / 23 = 291 days. That's 25th November 2024. This year, not next. Now for the caveats.
In the second half of last year, the rate of Russian losses accelerated. In part because of Russia's "must have a political win at all costs" approach. In part because Ukraine had refined it's tactics. Therefore the average rate of loss (and in particular artillery) has gone up considerably. Better drones and newer weapons (like GLSDBs) might crank this up. The main reason why Russia's hardware losses might go down is political - the political imperative to attack at all costs will decline after the sham election. Russia may well fall into a defensive mode, but I suspect it will continue to deploy artillery so long as it has shells to burn. And, Ukraine will be deploying more longer range drones and other surprises.
The other thing that could slow things down is simply that the deeper Russia goes into its stockpile the more time/resources are required to rebuild/refurbish older units. That may apply to the more sophisticated self propelled units, but probably doesn't apply to the older towed units.
In summary, those who hedge their predictions (like the authors of this video) should be aware that it is indeed possible for Russia to run out of (stockpiled) artillery this year. And if the rate of attrition goes up (for one of several reasons) then the exhaustion date starts moving back towards autumn.
Note that if you do the same figures for Russia's armoured vehicles and assume they had 15,000 of these pre-war (usable) then the most recent average rate of attrition is 23 units per day and Russia will exhaust its stockpile by June 22.
Funny. Hitler and German intelligence also thought that the USSR would run out of tanks and artillery in the autumn of 1942 but in the summer of 1945, the USSR had 4 times more tanks and artillery than at the beginning of the war.
Crazy amount of work hats of man
really useful analysis - thank you
Very, very well done. That and I'm super interested in your work. Keep it up
2 years of war, Russia have burned away 25 years of Soviet stock... (and know the Soviet economy was more than twice the Russia economy)
whats the point of military equipment if youre not going to use em ;)
no it moved 30% of itis stock to ukraine. its not buried - its fighting there.
@@sguploads9601 You clearly didn't watch the video.
@@dalooter2607 What about nukes?
@@dalooter2607deterrence.
Your OSINT is probably the best on youtube. Great video as always.
Well done.
Dedicated work guys.
Excellent work!
true Perun may use this work. The work here is wonderful.. Apples and oranges, I use his hard facts with other base line info and my knowledge to form a clear picture. And I have been able to follow the damages downward,, Great work.
I really find these types of videos interesting. When you start to look at the figures you see interesting trends or coincidences. When you look at the drop in numbers, combined for both types of artillery the number is 9334. Ukraine's approximated losses for artillery is currently 9274 (at the time of writing this comment). I've always wondered how accurate Ukraine's figures were, I always expected them to be a bit over inflated. But video shows that they are probably pretty accurate. I also wondered if the Ukraine figures included mortars, which I guess they do.
This video really helps to get a good picture on how the war is going. Looking forward to the 6 month review !
With the exception of KiA numbers, I would say Ukrainian numbers are in a 5%-15% variance interval from the real numbers.
@@munteanucatalin9833 Outside the first month or two of the conflict their numbers should be almost completely accurate. Duing the initial stages it was way too hectic and relies on self-reporting by units which was probably way overinlated at that time.
US satellite are probably better, more consistent and more up to date so Ukraine could use this the same way.
Nice channel lots of good information and will keep dropping by
Thank you sirs! Well done, and much appreciated.
Thanks!
That 3D imagery of the total counts was great to put into perspective
Thx for your work.
Thank you! I always look forward to your videos man
Makes sense. The Ukrainians haven't been able to make major gains so they've just been probing to temp artillery into firing and make itself vulnerable to counter battery.
thats cope
No it's because Russia has emptied all the prisoners and sent them to the front line.The joke is on Russia though all the prisoners six month contract is up,and now most are back in Russia acting crazy.
@@dalooter2607 Not really. Just strategy. Russia should try it sometime.
it is a strategy but the russians can also counter battery the counter battery. the reason why ukraine hasnt made any gains at all is not due to this strategy, its just that they cant make any gains. so what theyre saying is just cope with no evidence and just speculation@@CakeofWisdom
@@dalooter2607that’s exactly how you defeat an enemy that has more resources than you.
North Korean artillery shells are giving hell to the russian artillery pieces.
You are deceiving yourself by jumping to own desired conclusion because you clearly with what you imply do not want to consider that Russia is refurbishing artillery to have more consistent coverage along the frontline along less artillery shells fired per howitzer yet same amount of are fired due to more howitzers on the battlefield.
Russia fires 10,000 artillery shells per day compared to 2000 Ukraine.
The ukrainian ones, with extreme accuracy. That can't be said in Russia's case.
@lukapreradovic4466 how are russia achieving no battlefield gains while firing 5x the shells? That's astonishing really. Extremely poor accuracy? Extremely incompetent leadership? Bizarre
@@lukapreradovic4466That information comes from the Russian troops themselves. They’ve posted videos complaining about the NK shells. Some are damaging the artillery pieces and others are underpowered because the propellant isn’t burning correctly. For you to ignore that would be you trying to cling onto your desired outcome.
@@ShabazzTBL Despite this, the Neo-Con ISW states daily ADVANCES of Russia, with Ukraine advancing NOWHERE ON ANY FRONT? The New York Times assesses that more than 250 Square MILES of Ukraine has been GAINED, not lost, by Russia in 2023-2024! How can this be, Dreamer?
Amazing work. Subbed.
Excellent analysis
3:30 I literally choked on my coffee.
Its breakfast time here.
Great job! Since You know the storage bases very well.
Could You make a video about their locations and communication lines (train routes) that give us an overview where they are and how far they have to transport the equipment?
This time You would'nt have to analyze satellite images.
is there a reason to be that obsessed? I mean shit im pro russian..yet i dont ponder so deeply into NATO supplies and routes..do you not have a life to live?
A good suggestion. I would be interested in that.
@@Spazzfrom.1989LOL!!!😂
Excellent video, as always❤
Thank you for your work
Look at all the angry comments by the russians. 😂😂😂 I thought CZcams was banned there? 😂😂😂
You would think that when they start to take stuff from storage, they would take the best and most functional stuff first. So, as they get lower and lower in the stockpiles, the stuff they pull out will take more time and resources to refurbish. And, at some point what's left is just rusted junk. So, just because they have a lot of stuff in storage, doesnt really mean they have a lot of usable stuff they can draw from.
And the deeper they go into storage they also might need to pull multiple units to combine them into a single functional one and turn the left overs into spare parts and scrap. So the pull rate will rise faster then the units reaching the front.
China is supplying Russia with everything it needs.
I would think they would take the stuff closest to the exit and let someone else worry about if it's functional.
@@peterroe2993 they don't though, things are pulled from all over the yard.
And it doesn't it do not work ryt??
Great work!
Great work.
Interesting that their MSTA-S or 2S19 increased from 115 per war to 130 in the video.
that's their latest type, and the only one (self propelled) in production, highly possible they will be producing that one more than they lose. The other self-propelled types though are not in production and these stocks are all they have, so those very much can't increase at all.
@@arcaipekyun4232 No their latest type is the 2S35, but not sure if there are enough of them to be in storage yet.
@@Misaka_Complex It looks like the main production is still 2S19 Msta, and 2S35 Koalitsiya production since 2015 is still very slow, similar to T-90M and T-14 Armata.
I heard that they are replacing tanks at the rate of 50 per month with vehicle from storage, renewed or brand new, but they are losing over 60 per month. It’s not just the equipment though, it’s also the manpower lost to man new artillery and tanks that needs to be trained
They are making more like 100 or even bit more per month. 80% of which are refurbished though. And are losing tanks at almost the same pace. Their visually confirmed loss of tanks is currently 118 per month over the entire war. The real number probably being significantly higher. They are heading towards destination fucked real fast.
According to Ukrainian loss reports, they lost 11 tanks _per day_ on average. Which is like 330 per month.
@@traumflug That's over short periods of time, when Russia is on the offensive. About 100 a month is the long-term average.
Against that, Russia has only recently been able to add 100 tanks a month to those in active service, so would be able to maintain frontline numbers only if they can get their losses down. Losing 100-150 tanks net a month has to be set against being able to refurbish maybe 3,000 tanks in total, and produce 30-50 a month at expanded capacity. Simple maths says, at this rate, that Russia can sustain a significant tank force for 3-4 years. However, unless Ukraine can significantly expand the number of tanks and other weapons systems systems, little will change on the battlefield.
@@cacwgm 330/month is the average over the last 6 months.
Far more than 60. Heck you can watch that many destroyed per month on a casual survey of video evidence of the same.
I love this channel, I get excited every time you bring out a new video haha
Sharp analysis(as always)! Compliments... ♾
The reserves will not be depleted down to zero due to general defence-of-the-nation requirements. So, the crisis point will come earlier, although lessened by new production, but it will come. Each towed artillery piece also requires a tower, so fewer artillery pieces might actually make it easier to manoeuver them ;-)
Same story with tanks.
A lot of people are counting down to zero and extrapolating from there. But its reasonably safe to assume that if the Russian's had c3,000 tanks in the pre-war Army that that is what they believe they require for normal territorial defence. From CC's tank videos we know they had between 6-7,000 in storage on top, with at least 1,000 of those non-recoverable (probably closer to 2,000 but lets play safe...). Add on the 3,000 in the main force, but then deduct 3,000 that have been destroyed or captured (Oryx' total +25% for tanks not seen destroyed). And we're looking at 5,000-6,000 tanks remaining, and that is being very generous. Its likely less than that. And a lot of these are still in storage and are not actually operational yet...and in terrible condition.
From that very generous 5-6,000 left you can take off 3,000 to be what the Russian's would deem as absolutely essential for home defence.....leaving 2,000-3,000 left, probably even fewer than that...and they're only building a maximum (again very generous) 100 new tanks per year.....we actually may be approaching the point at which Russia has to start actively conserving its tanks to avoid them cutting into the 'Do not go lower' figure of 3,000....and at that point they have to tacitly abandon winning the war in a total fashion (as much as it is possible to do so anyway..).
Another year of this, if the West can get its act together and supply Ukraine, and Russia might be on the cusp of defeat...
@@dogsnads5634 I agree with your numbers, but yours is a rational discourse, whereas Russia's behaviour is not rational, otherwise they would not have even started this war. So I also think that the territorial defence discourse could also be bypassed in an 'all or nothing' logic, where what matters is to win this war at all costs to prove that 'we have defeated NATO'. Which is a very risky strategy in a country that has already experienced the attempted secession of Chechnya, and other similar stories could come in a possible future context of military weakening. But this is Russia.
@@marcopascucci7580 I agree. And Putin knows his survival is at stake...if he loses, and is seen to lose, his days 'may' be numbered (or the ruling clique will back him as they fear the loss of their own power under an alternative...).
A thought that cropped to mind is, would they take towed pieces to refurbishing plants only to remove the barrel and give spares to the SPGs?
One would have assumed they'd have plenty of spares with a park that huge, but allegedly not. That the Soviets assumed the artillery piece would be destroyed before it needed a replacement barrel.
Now with the attrition rate, the number of "lost" Towed pieces may mostly correspond to lost barrels, not necessarily guns.
Just a thought.
a gun without a barrel is no use is it ? Another thought is are the guns from the depots only replacements or to increase frontline volume ?
@@wgm7638 It's no use "now", but it is very different from a destroyed gun. Say, once the barrel production lines are re-opened those chassis can be rapidly re-barreled and are back in service.
Like a vehicle without a tyre. It is useless for its intended job, but it is also just one spare away from being 100% operational.
Compare that to having a wreck of a vehicle because someone dropped a bomb on it. :P
@whitescar2
Remaking just a barrel for some gun or any gun is a hideous job bearing in mind the nummer of guns in russian service. How many barrels to make and for what gun seems a near impossible task for presumebly already overstretched factories.
@@wgm7638 Again, this is a concern in wartime. Honestly, if I were Russia, I'd take the barrels off and send them. They're using up barrels with their fire rates in huge numbers anyway, and you can send 10 barrels in the space of 1 gun.
When the war is over, you just keep making replacement barrels and fit them onto the carriages, to get more fully functional pieces.
Sending complete guns is wasteful compared to barrels, and if you're not actually losing entire guns to enemy action at such rate, why would you push them into frontline storage when only the barrel is important?
Of course, if Russia truly *is* losing guns at this rate, then that changes things. Still, Russia plays a much longer game than we do and clearly have few qualms about cobbling together tanks and equipment from scavenged parts to make 1 thing work.
@@wgm7638all good points from both of you, but missing one detail: a barrel is more usefull on a self propelled gun than on a towed one. They probably take the barrels from the towed ones to keep the self propelled ones in action.
In this war, stationary guns are as food as dead, so they use all parts for the mobile ones
Probably
And an increase in overal numbers, not so much. They fired 80.000 shells each day in summer 2022, and far less today, even with the North-Korean ones. Maybe 20% increase in numbers, 30% loss replacement, 50% wear replacement
Probably...
great job !
Thank you amazing work
Maybe the reason they still have more self-propelled in storage is that it is more difficult to maintain than towed, so what's left is junk.
Or, lot of those are getting parted and not moving from where they are being stored.
I wonder how much artillery they are losing due to barrel wear? Barrel life is about 2000-5000 rounds. So given that the Russians fire about 10000-15000 rounds a day, they must be losing several artillery pieces a day
15000 rounds a day dispersed to around 3500 artillery pieces in a 670km front so do the math bro lol . 1 artillery piece is not going to be firing 5k rounds a day lol did you get a F in Math in high school?
@@Miami1991 Bro, just think harder and you will understand
@@Miami1991not the smartest boi in school are we?
@@Miami1991and Igor, Americans use miles. Just saying. Down right stupid are we?
@@Miami1991 It's averaged wear.
Let those 3500 artillery pieces each fire their 4-10 rounds a day, for 200 days and you'll suddenly have 3500 artillery pieces failing at once, averaging out to several artillery pieces failing per day...
That's how averages work.
Please don't go on about other's failures in math when averages are already beyond your capabilities.
Great work 👏
Great video as usual. Interesting to see that total 2s19s stored went up by 15. Perhaps some previously stored inside or battlefield damaged ones were moved to storage to scavenge for parts. Also amazing that Russia still has 5 world war II-vintage ML-20s in storage!
The mortar numbers are shocking 😮
They're definitely mostly scavenging for barrels as opposed to replacing losses.
Thank you for your excellent work. ❤
Thanks for your hard work!
The fact that it has dropped so much is insane. They can’t keep this up. They will literally run out of it at this rate.
Yes because the gave all their manufacturing to China and are a service based economy reliant on third world cheap labor for gdp growth… oh wait wrong country.
Maybe in a year or two
@@ahmadshasha3632 The thing I thought about while watching is that they would take out the best and easiest to ready first. Whatever remains is of lesser quality. This is my assumption.
they will get more from NK and maybe iran and china by seruptitous means.
NK yes, Iran does not have the stock and China won't supply weaponry @@ronblack7870
Whatever amount we previously thought they had, we now know that a lot of their weapons in storage haven’t been maintained correctly due to endemic corruption of the procurement and maintenance contracts.
Great as always
Cracking work chaps 👌
I expect the towed artillery is wearing the barrels out faster as they are likely older.
Metallurgy doesn't care if your barrel is 5 or 50 years old. These are stainless steel qualities, they do not degrade with time.
@MrDael01 yes but older guns might have worse alloys or looser tolerances causing shell bounce. If nothing else they were maybe fired more over the years of service when russia had 2m men in their army.
And crews are easier to train then an spg. So it will be their main source of replacements.
I think it is more likely that they simply are super susceptible to counter battery fire. Can't shoot-and-scoot, no armor.
I wouldn't want that job.
@@MrDael01yes 50 Siberian winters would have no effect at all 😂.
You're joking right there is a limit to what stainless steel can endure when directly exposed to harsh conditions. There is a reason the USA keeps all of its tanks in the desert due to low humidity and heat.
I really appreciate your videos dude, I'm turbo busy breeding cats, zero time for daily news, so it's nice to know you're focused on updating us about the military hardware in conflict zones, between you, sub brief, what's going on with shipping, and Level1techs I get all the news I need on the weekends :) Thanks dude.
Incredible work
If you consider the wear on the barrels plus low quality Iranian and North Korean artillery shells, the Orcs are having a problem putting shells on target.
Orcs against nazis? School showdowns)
Spoken like a NAFO bot.
How many units are they able to produce in a month?
Difficult to say. Russia claims it can produce something like 1200 in a year. This number is hyper-inflated. First of all, Russia counts brand new off the line and refurbished/cannibalized as New. Also Russia has been known to just add a 0 to their figures. This is especially true of Russian Generals on the front lying to their superiors to avoid punishment. I would say they can probably produce a couple hundred brand new of the self-propelled and a couple hundred brand new of the towed in a year.
Given the fact that it's not uncommon for Ukraine to destroy two to three dozen of these a day, Russia hemorrhages around 800 to 900 artillery systems a year. I would lean more to Cabal's 18 months timeline when we could see Russia run out of artillery, most likely towed first as it's way more vulnerable.
@@jpa5038 what punishment lmao, this isn't 1941
they sure can be brownnosing however as most of the structure is political as talented people tend to have a spine and resist stupid orders so they get sacked
That's a good question. By the looks of it, not enough to replace current losses.
@@Klovaneer While I agree with the sentiment that Putin values loyalty over competence and even sees competence as a threat, we have reports of Russian officers being sent to the front line as punishment for failures on the battlefield.
I would be surprised if they are producing new artillery at this point. At least at scale. They have a large amount of reserve to go through AND maintenance on existing stock would take a lot of label.
The most important piece is, of course, is the barrel. More likely they be investing in refurbishing barrels instead of trying to mass produce new ones.
Great video
Nice video, thanks for posting. But the artillery scales are unfortunately tipping heavily in the Russian favor even with these huge losses. Shells are the problem. Ukraine has said it ideally needs 10k shells a day to match the Russians' current rate. They arent going to get that but the U.S. and Europe planned to provide 2.4 million a year by 2025, IF they can ramp up production. How are we doing?
In the U.S., we've invested a lot to up our production of 155 mm shells. We will double production this year but only from 168k to 336k. IF the U.S. passes the next aid supplemental, we could up it to 1.2 million in 2025. Europe was supposed to match this but has really struggled to up its production and will not come close to its targets. And then there's the price problem. In the U.S., we've been able to keep it down to around 3k a shell. In Europe, it can be as high as 8k per shell as they are not as shielded as much from market forces in Europe.
What about Russia? We dont know for sure but the Estonian defense ministry--a very reputable source--estimated Russian shell production at 4.5 million . . . this year. That includes refurbished shells but regardless it is far far beyond what the West can produce even next year. And then they have NK's prodigious stores as well. And the price? $600. Yes, they are poorer quality but they work well enough.
Please don't take this the wrong way. I hate these numbers as much as anybody, but if we dont confront the facts, we are going to make poor decisions going forward. The unfortunate reality is that we are in an attritional fight and Russia has big resource advantages despite the pasting they've taken. We put a lot of faith in our sanctions crushing the Russian economy. That hasnt happened. It grew at 5 percent in the second half of last year. They have doubled pre war production in critical sectors, including tanks, artillery, and drones. They can keep this up for a long time yet. Wishful thinking benefits nobody.
By the same token, Soviet/Russian military doctrine mandates an 8:1 advantage in artillery in order to function. One may well ask, how are they doing?
I wonder what we would have to do in order for the U.S and Europe to start increasing production to a satisfactory number. I get it's mostly politics, but surely there are other factors limiting how quickly we scale up? Something we can hopefully deal with relatively quickly?
@@flowershopapt Getting people to realize they have been on the receiving end of hybrid warfare for over a decade now would be a good start...
@@currawong60911368 Not in order to function. That was the ideal ratio the Soviets sought in order to successfully prosecute a major offensive. Currently, daily fire rates are reported as about 10k to 2k or 5 to 1. These of course fluctuate day to day. It's also not the 1970s. Russian doctrine is similar but not the same. Indeed, there are reports that Russia is beginning to favor more accurate fires, both because of their own production limitations and having seen the effectiveness of certain Western systems. The point is not that the Russian artillery advantage is game over for Ukraine. It is, however, strong evidence that the chances of Ukraine ejecting Russia from its soil in the foreseeable future is sadly quite remote. It also explains partially why Moscow believes it will prevail in a long war. What I am describing is well understood in Washington. You're not going to hear the Pentagon harp on it for morale/propaganda purposes, but those pulling for total Ukrainian victory need to start tempering expecations.
@@Gothmog2266 Sort of. "functioning" and "offensive" are a bit the same when one has tanks that are not designed to reverse in any meaningful way. If you know what I mean. Regarding "remote", were you around for 1989 perchance? Most of the USSR were thinking the same way. Until they weren't. Good to talk.👍
The big question is how many are in the active force on the frontline.
There's also probably guns pulled from storage and in warehouses or factories getting overhauled. I hypothesize that at any one time there are likely some hundreds of towed guns and SPGs at supply bases closer to Ukraine to act as immediate replacements since I can't imagine the Russians wait until an artillery piece is lost before pulling from storage and finding out it needs a 3 month overhaul and the army is just gonna have to do without. There's a whole pipeline there from Siberian field, to refurbishment, to Forward Depot that has not only guns but other equipment as well.
Indeed. But once it goes into use, it is on its way to being worn out and retired.
That asumes they have enough logistical capacity to build and maintain worthwhile reserves at the frontlines at their burn rates.
With the insane amou t of shells russia is firing i doubt they are able to keep much frontline reserves though.
@@baronvonlimbourgh1716 That insane amount of shells requires guns to fire it, considering the rate has only increased recently it is safe to assume the capacity is there to transport not only spare artillery but other equipment as well since the Russians don't seem to be short of men, machines and munitions to hurl into the attack.
Daaamn thats a lot to count😅
Great work as always, hoping to see the IFV one in coming months
I very much enjoyed your video and I gave it a Thumbs Up
They got hooked up from Nrth Korea and Iran, yeah?
With artillery shells, not guns that I’m aware of.
So they are already out of towed mortars. 2300 pieces just gone. That's insane.
Why is that insane? Those barrels get worn down after a few hundred shots.
@@tlanimass952 I would guess that Russia already lost ten times the number of mortars the German army has in it's inventory
you guys are saying they are out of equipment since 2022, no, Russia will not run out of equipment.
@@bussolini6307 look at the numbers. It's simple arithmetics. Very simple indeed.
@@hg6996it’s simple as in you can forget about Russia “running out of something”
So good.
Love the audio level. No joke
You need to watch his May 2023 artillery video to understand the situation. The towed artillery was getting destroyed mainly from excessive usage. The Russian shells used per day has drop from 40000-60000 to 10000 per day. The Ukrainians are going after the SPGs more effectively. The Russians lossed over 1000 SPGs since May 2023. The Russian Army will run out of armored vehicles first then SPGs then tanks then towed artillery. They could be propped up by their allies. Another issue is that Russians will run out of workable equipment before the storage runs out. They will not have enough workable equipment to destroy, so lose rates will drop. The Russians will run out of workable tanks by the end of the year.
Yes. It would be interesting to see the Russian figures for barrels written off as worn out vs combat losses/barrel failures.
Screenshoting this to laugh at later, thanks
Same as they were running out of missiles last year?
Uh oh someone isn’t keeping up with
Ok, let's wait until the end of 2024 to see of that's true, if not only they still have military equipment left by the end of the year but also benefit from superiority in artillery and military equipment, it's safe to assume that everything we hear from the west about Russia's poor military production is false and that some people really are underestimating Russia's capabilities to replenish it's losses, per usual.
Yankee in his element again; he looks at the satellite images and sees that the howitzers are missing and of course concludes that they were destroyed, instead of concluding that he once knew their location and now he doesn't. 😆
Sophism or paralogism, that's the question...
If you had basic comprehension, you would clearly hear him saying that probably most of those are still fine/ put into new artillery units/ used to refurbish corresponding SPA. He never mentioned that most of them were destroyed, he just assessed the stockpile. Tbh i dont even know why i am wasting my time arguing with a Russian moron
Great job. Yr time analysis of projected losses seems linear, which i dont think is correct but is a very conservative estimate
this is some great open-source IMINT, I'm sure it was a lot of work.. respect!
I think the lower mobilization rate of self propelled artilelry can be explained by a simple fact:
There is very little you can steal from a towed artillery piece as opposed to a self propelled one. Knowing the state of corruption in Russia, this might be a great contributing factor.
That and the fact that SPGs are far more complex. Engines left standing in a field for 4 or 5 decades aren't coming back any time soon.
*sigh* we've been through this since 2022, I thought that by early 2023 people like you would stop with that nonsense.
You still believe today's Russia is 90's Russia, and nothing and no matter how much data anyone shows you, you still will believe that.
So the 9000+ destroyed artillery reported by Ukraine are not totally unrealistic.
We don't know how many were in use at the start of the war vs now, but about 1,500 self propelled and 7,900 towed pieces have left storage. It also doesn't account for new pieces built or pieces 'destroyed' and then repaired.
So not unrealistic at all.
@arlekino4688 said after another smashing Russian victory where they only need to lose 500 vehicles to take 1/3rd of the village of stepove
Also, 1 artillery piece taken out of storage doesn't necessarily mean 1 artillery piece sent to the front.
They might look at one and decide it's broken so send it to be smelted down, or cannibalize one to repair another. Taking the barrels from towed artillery and using them to replace the barrels of self propelled artillery is apparently a common practice.
Update: the artillery bombardments have gone back up in number to what they were around the time of Bahkmut.
Still a big reserve, but how many of their SPGs are in working order, and how many are basicly scrap,
Also the general state of the barels when stores outside is questinable, and could affect accuracy (if that has ever been an issue for Russia), and i imagine also how long the barels are gonna last.
7:11 you really expect us to believe Russia had only 44 towed mortars left?!
🤣🤣🤣
That are visible at the targeted locations.
Visual storage, is just very verifiable metrics. They could have stuff in a hanger, or parts in waxed/oiled boxes. In the US I saw a hanger full of Sherman clutches before. There could be similar storage.
However, parts in long term storage. Probably are either exhausted, it is one of the best explanations for the pace that Russia is running out of visually confirmed stuff.
Probably have hundreds on the front lines. But, we will see when they start getting equipment shortages.